AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown • Hacker News Board

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#101

Post by ams6110 » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 9:22 PM UTC

obblekk wrote: post #5

I’m sure many of us believe in following and enforcing laws (even flawed laws like 150yr copyright), but are still made uneasy by this development. I think the source of that discomfort is - what happens if your service is cut in error. Do you trust ATT to have a fair, easy appeals process? Competition in the form of space internet can’t come soon enough, not to enable pirates, but to ensure normal people have reason…

AT&T is not going to be too eager to cut your service. They want your $50 - $150/month (or more) if they can get it.

FTA: The bottom line: Very few copyright infringers ever get booted from their broadband provider, pointing to the severity of these cases and the number of steps at which the customer is told they are violating copyright before they are cut off from AT&T's service. Copyright infringers are often illegally pirating hundreds of hours of stolen content, not a song or two from their favorite band.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#102

Post by Spivak » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 9:27 PM UTC

dawnerd wrote: post #99

Spivak wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of legitimate usage, I'm talking about the fact that masking your traffic with a VPN isn't really protection when these 'courts' can demand you prove you weren't pirating content in order to restore your service. So getting away with piracy by way of plausible deniability is much harder.

They’re not real courts so no they can’t demand you to prove anything. I don’t know where you’re coming from but it’s nothing but unsubstantiated fear.

Forget the term courts. An ISP is within their rights to refuse to do business with you on the suspicion that you are a suspected pirate. If you then decide to go through their process they are also within their rights to continue not doing business with you until you voluntarily turn over evidence that you were in-fact not pirating content.

And since, for me at least, if I got my internet shut off I would pretty much have to move that's plenty of coercive power.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#103

Post by jrnichols » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 9:31 PM UTC

sbov wrote: post #17

eiaoa wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> what happens if your service is cut in error. Do you trust ATT to have a fair, easy appeals process? This is where many of the arguments against government regulation break down. If you take government out of the picture, you're still left dealing with massive institutions and bureaucratic regulations. The main difference is that those institutions are even less accountable to the average person than the government…

But if AT&T unfairly cuts you off from the internet, you could just go to a competitor!

I detect the sarcasm there.

and you're right! you can totally bail and go to the competition... like HughesNet. They're just the same, right?

(also more sarcasm)

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#104

Post by Kenji » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 9:36 PM UTC

obblekk wrote: post #5

I’m sure many of us believe in following and enforcing laws (even flawed laws like 150yr copyright), but are still made uneasy by this development. I think the source of that discomfort is - what happens if your service is cut in error. Do you trust ATT to have a fair, easy appeals process? Competition in the form of space internet can’t come soon enough, not to enable pirates, but to ensure normal people have reason…

> I’m sure many of us believe in following and enforcing laws (even flawed laws like 150yr copyright)

Actually no, why the fuck would I? Retarded laws must be broken as much and as hard as possible until the government has no choice but to change or drop them. Pressure must be exerted from the lowest ranks of the population.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#105

Post by zdragnar » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 9:58 PM UTC

craftyguy wrote: post #13

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s a website that is run by both the entertainment industry and the ISPs, they’re working together The entertainment industry wants takedowns eagerly enforced. The ISPs don't want to do work. Ignoring complaints is the predictable outcome. (As is AT&T becoming stricter about copyright enforcement after buying a content company.)

> pay $35 And make a quick buck on the side too!

Then get sued for fraudulently taking people's money without fulfilling the advertised service.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#106

Post by zdragnar » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 10:01 PM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #86

tantalor wrote: post #8

The podcast Reply-All had a good episode about why this is problematic earlier this year. https://www.gimletmedia.com/reply-all/118 Excerpt: ALEX: So finally, I find this website that is called the Center for Copyright information. PJ: And what’s that? ALEX: It’s a website that is run by both the entertainment industry and the ISPs, they’re working together. And the deal is, if you feel that you have wrongly received…

> you can go to this website, pay $35, and you can appeal it. If you get ignored but you paid, does it mean you're open to make it a small claim case with binding result? Or would that only recover your money (after a fee of $50 or so...)

Someone (an attorney general, perhaps?) might be able to make a fraud case against them. Or, a class could pull together to pool damages, if a court approves the class (which I suspect it would).

Small claims courts are typically limited to actual damages; you're not going to get a heavy "punishment" fine added on top. So, yeah, you'll get your $35 back, minus filing costs.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#107

Post by xigency » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 10:01 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #73

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s a website that is run by both the entertainment industry and the ISPs, they’re working together The entertainment industry wants takedowns eagerly enforced. The ISPs don't want to do work. Ignoring complaints is the predictable outcome. (As is AT&T becoming stricter about copyright enforcement after buying a content company.)

Anymore, the ISPs and the entertainment industry are the same entities. AT&T owns WarnerMedia, formerly Time Warner, which owns cable networks, movie & music studios. Most of the entertainment Americans consume are owned or produced by AT&T or a subsidiary.

Don't forget NBC /Universal/Comcast.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#108

Post by autoexec » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 10:13 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #24

I wonder when this will spread to other industries? Say someone doesn't pay their newspaper bill. Maybe contact their water company and ask them to shut off their water, to encourage them to pay. It's worth a try, right? I get why content rights owners go to the ISP to get at the ISP's customers who are doing things they don't like. I don't get why ISPs play along. It's extra work, and it makes the customer hate the…

The DMCA forces ISPs to play along to some extent. It means ISPs have to have a process that includes termination for repeat offenders. The specifics are pretty vague and AT&T is being very aggressive but believe me ISPs don't want to have to play internet police for media conglomerates. They have to spend substantial amounts of time and money handling massive volumes of DMCA notices without compensation and risk pissing off and losing customers over unproven allegations of illegal activity. It's not a good position to be in.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#109

Post by notyourday » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 10:18 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #73

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s a website that is run by both the entertainment industry and the ISPs, they’re working together The entertainment industry wants takedowns eagerly enforced. The ISPs don't want to do work. Ignoring complaints is the predictable outcome. (As is AT&T becoming stricter about copyright enforcement after buying a content company.)

Anymore, the ISPs and the entertainment industry are the same entities. AT&T owns WarnerMedia, formerly Time Warner, which owns cable networks, movie & music studios. Most of the entertainment Americans consume are owned or produced by AT&T or a subsidiary.

Which is why the next multi-billion dollar company is a simple ISP, the one charging $$ for delivering IP packets. Unfortunately, it is not sexy enough for VCs to fund.

Re: AT&T to cut off some customers' service in piracy crackdown

#110

Post by autoexec » Wed, Nov 07, 2018, 10:23 PM UTC

slyall wrote: post #57

dionidium wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

References to 150-year copyrights is (deliberate or not) pure obfuscation. We're talking about downloading the latest box office hits†, not century-old texts bound by unjust extensions to copyright. † Edit: in most but obviously not all cases

According to the media companies it is just important to cover those century-old texts as the latest Star Wars movie. People are exactly as guilty (and should feel exactly as guilty) download one as downloading the other.

Personally I can't feel guilty about it. Copyright was a compromise. A limited privilege of exclusive rights to encourage the creation of new works after which they would fall into the public domain and everyone would have full access to them.

Companies have gone back on their end of that bargain and now we have perpetual copyrights and new works will never enter the public domain. Deal broken, I feel no need to uphold my end by respecting the rights they were granted.